Hyperluminal Neutrinos..:)

Hyperluminal Neutrinos

Today I will talk about a blockbuster research result from CERN. They discovered that Neutrinos can travel faster than the speed of light.  That has been in the News, hot from the Press...:) Earth shattering discovery.

Within the framework of the Hypergeometrical Universe theory,  a more fundamental theory, this higher than the speed of light amazing discovery is simply explained away with a simple phrase:

 Hyperluminal Neutrinos  ==  Dispersion
That is Electron Neutrinos are just asymmetric mode dilatons 

Einstein's made many great contributions to Science. The photoelectric effect; proving the existence of atoms by modeling Brownian motion. I have to say, even Restrict Relativity was a great achievement since it emphasized the need for an interpretation where observed (proper) time had to be expanded to explain the observed Universe. I consider General Relativity his least contribution due to the ad-hoc nature of his equations and the resulting confusion of equations with a pole.  They were the source of the Black Hole conjecture.

In the past, I went further and  explained how the passage of time is dependent upon which laws we choose to describe the Universe in The Image in the Mirror posting. Within the Hypergeometrical Universe, instead of Newton's Gravitational Law (the one with a horrendous pole at zero distance), I proposed that dilators (Hypergeometrical Universe "particles") dilate in phase with the surrounding dilaton field.  This is called the Quantum Lagrangian Principle and it is easily supported by considerations of metric deformation quantization (which lays a level deeper than our observed Quantum Mechanics).

By the way, that pole is the reason why we were misguided into considering the existence of a singularity or dressed singularity or Black Hole. The negation of the existence of a singularity naked or covered is different from saying that there isn't compact distributions of matter that irradiates little or no visible ligth.  This objection only refers to the spacetime representation with Mass Dependent Curvature.  This curvature is dependent upon what laws we use to describe motion. If you law has a pole, then the curvature or spacetime will have to have a singularity.  If you choose a law without a pole, there will be no need for a singularity.

The Quantum Fundamental Principle defines the position of dilators at each consecutive de Broglie step of expansion of the Hyperspherical Universe.  There is an accumulation point at 45 degrees with respect to the hyperspherical 3D universe. At that angle, matter is traveling at the speed of light and displacements at each de Broglie step approaches asymptotically zero, that is, no motion at time goes by on each and every other reference frame.  An dense assemble of dilators will create exact these conditions and light (which is generate by charge motion) will not be generated. In fact, the Black Hole should really be seemed at low frequency radiowaves from that line of reasoning.

All particles, with the exception of the Neutrino, are variations of the Fundamental Dilator and represent coherences with periods close to multiples of the Fundamental Dilator period.  This makes them strong interacting.  Since they contains the Fundamental Dilator as one of their sub-coherences, they contain local metric deformations that have non zero displacement volume per cycle  in nature.

The Neutrino, on the other hand, is a ellipsoid of revolution with only two non-null axes.  Since the axes have opposing values the total displacement volume per cycle is null and it also has the wrong frequency.

I haven't paid enough attention to the 4 dimensional ellipsoid of revolution physical model for the dilators, but I will try to make everything coherent there.  The physical representation of the dilators is not necessary for this theory to make sense.

Protons, Neutrons, etc have three non-null axes of revolution. Electron and Electron-Neutrino have only two. Electron has a non-zero displacement volume per cycle while neutrino has a zero displacement volume per cycle due to its opposing sign axes' lengths.

This will become clearer next.

Let's review the Neutron Model to make sense of what I just wrote.This was first present in the Review of the Hyperon Family Up to the Pion.


Review of Electron, Proton and Neutron Models

Let take a look at the Fundamental Dilator once again.

The Electron(Proton):

The fundamental dilator is a 4D coherence between stationary states of deformation. The deformation of space is quantized, that is, can be represented as states in a 4D double potential well.

The respective coherence for Electron and Proton are shown below:

and for a Proton:

Notice that the Proton and Electron coherences differ only by which is the initial (in phase) state in the coherence. The states associated with the Electron (0,-2/3,-1/3) and (0,-1/3,-2/3) differ not by "energy" since they have the same 3D volume (the Hpergeometrical Universe equivalent to Energy is the 3D projection of the 4D Volume) but by time. It takes time to rotate the dilator around (at the speed of light) and that introduces an extra phase delay on the Tunnelling Process with respect to the Spinning Process. Remember that all particles in the Universe are described in terms of combinations of this two fundamental dilators and that they have Spin Half, that is, they spin at half the speed of tunneling...:) A nice touch, I might say...:)

The Neutron is the first dimmer or two chord sequence. Its Balls Diagram is shown below:
 Notice that I decided to use Red Balls for Positive and Green Balls for Negative moieties...:) Electrician Conventions... (never cut the Green Wire...)  :)

Notice that the diagram above introduce one transmutation chord:

• Electron-Proton Transmutation Chord

The dimmer character is derived from the impossibility to determine which dimensional note (Electron or Proton) is in phase with the Universe. Under these conditions the Neutron is represented by the two states (one starting with the electron and another starting with the proton) with half probability each one.


The Nature of Neutrinos


Below we show the Anti-Neutrino Coherence.

The anti-neutrino corresponds to the composite of the two transmutation chords found in the neutron coherence. That is the reason that if you split a neutrino, you will be able to create anti-mater out of Matter.

Someday I will explain that in a posting..:) Splitting Hairs and Neutrinos...:)

The 3D Volume Displacement equation is given by:
Neutron(1/3,1/3,-2/3) = Proton(2/3,2/3,-1/3) + Electron(0,-1/3,-2/3) + Anti-Neutrino(-1/3,0,1/3)

That means, unlike the electron which is also has only two axes but corresponds to a net decrease in local metric displacement volume (decrease in one phase but a net increase in the alternative phase when protons become a net decrease), the neutrino is always a net zero local metric displacement volume change.  In the example above, the anti-neutrino corresponds to a shrinkage along the X dimension and an stretch on the Z dimension.  This local metric modulation changes the moment of inertia of the sub-coherence and allow for the electron-proton transmutation.  The local metric modulation changes the moment of inertia and in doing so changes the timing between tunneling and spinning within the four-dimensional spatial manifold.

The anti-neutrino corresponds to the electron-proton + proton-electron transmutation.  I struggled to figure out if that sub-coherence was supposed to be in the lower states or in the upper states.

I had to decide if the transmutations corresponds to this sequence
(0,-2/3,-1/3) > (2/3,2/3,-1/3)>(2/3,-1/3,2/3)>(2/3,2/3,-1/3)
or
(0,-2/3,-1/3)>(0,-1/3,-2/3)>(0,-2/3,-1/3)>(2/3,2/3,-1/3)
that is, I had to decide if the delay was cause by a 3D rotation (rotation within the 3D hypersurface) while the coherence was in the lower or in the upper state (proton or electron states).

After looking at the assignments for all the hyperons and analyzing all hyperon decay equations, I decided that the anti-neutrino (electron-neutrino) would correspond to a 3D rotation (rotation within the 3D Hypersurface) while the neutron coherence was in the proton state, to my surprise.:)  I was hoping for a neater result, that is, that the anti-neutrino would correspond to a rotation while the dilator coherence is in the electron state..:) but such is life... full of disappointments..:)

Now we know that the neutrino corresponds to a coherence involving the following diagram

it becomes easier to understand the relationship between this diagram and the (-1/3,0,1/3) representation.


If I shrink everything along X and and equally stretch everything along Z, that would correspond to a rotation around the Y axis, or a rotation in the 3D space.


Now let's compare the Neutrino with light.  

In my theory light is a modulation of the source position of the dilaton field. The dilaton field is continuously irradiated without loss of energy.  In the same way an electromagnetic field would be irradiated without loss if there weren't any absorbers around.  For an electromagnetic coherence to decay and energy be absorbed or irradiated, a dephasing event has to occur. Like in the case of a Boy in the Swing, if one doesn't push the swing in an out-of-phase fashion, energy is never lost nor absorbed (disregarding friction). The propagation of the dilaton field occurs in a pristine 4D spatial manifold without anything to absorb that dilaton field.

Both have zero net metric displacement per cycle. They differ in the nature of their modes.  Like electromagnetic modes, electromagnetic waves are just modulations of a modulation (the dilaton field).  The dilaton field can be thought as a TEM00 or totally symmetric mode. Of course, the Electron Neutrino can be thought as the first asymmetric mode.  The dilaton mode is not transversal, it is volumetric. The Neutrino mode is asymmetric and transversal.

In the case of deformation of the local metric, one would expect DISPERSION, that is, different modes with different coherences and frequencies would travel at different speeds, thus the difference in speed between Neutrinos and Photons.

Please feel free to ask me questions.  They will help me to clarify the points in this posting.

QED.

Cheers,

MP

PS_ I refreshed the version of my theory, that is, the PDF in this page corresponds to the paper I presented at the 7th Vigier Symposium in London last year.

A Simple Theory of The Mind

Some 12 years ago, I was thinking about life and came up with some understanding of how the Mind works... Not how it is organized anatomically...:) I didn't have access to free floating brains...:) but how a human personality is created and maintained.

I created a very short, no BS, theory and posted in here:

http://TheAgentTheoryOfTheMind.blogspot.com

Please feel free to criticize, correct, point my misspellings, etc.

I've been very busy but will come back to The Hypergeometrical Universe Theory eventually.

Cheers,

MP

Quantum Gravity

Quantum Gravity



I am finally free of extra chores and will start developing the Quantum Gravity argument next.


Cheers,


MP

Infinite Dimensionality and the Quantum Lagrangian Principle

Infinite Dimensionality as a Bridge to Quantum Mechanics

In Physics, more specifically in Quantum Chromodynamics there are neat renormalization tricks, meant to ABRACADABRA some infinities (self-energy) etc...

One of these tricks is called Dimensional Renormalization. Normally it involves redeploying a theory in an N dimensional space and then making N go to 4 or 3. When that happens the infinities disappears or become meaningful within that new framework.

Recently, Dudley R. Herschbach, A.K.A. dude...:) (just kidding, Dudley) used a variation of Dimensional Renormalization in which instead of recovering regularized equations when N goes to 4, he obtained "Surprisingly Accurate Semiclassical Results" resembling Pure Quantum Mechanical Results by making N go to infinity...:)


Also surprisingly is that that same trick worked fine in the calculation of energy levels of atoms (molecules with a single positive center..:)

That is fine and dandy...:) but what is missing is the reasoning behind that coincidence...:) Nobody, including Dudley, is saying that the Universe is infinitely dimensional or the reason for Quantum Mechanics is the infinite dimensionality of the Universe. I should comment that he used the word Dimensional Scaling as opposed to Dimensional Renormalization, but that is a minor detail, just a name...

The unaddressed Hocus Pocus is the WHY? Why would an infinite dimensional Universe lead to Simple and Surprisingly Accurate Approach to the Chemical Bond Obtained from Dimensional Scaling ...:)
 
To understand that, one should delve deep into the details of the derivation by Professor Herschbach. He did not found that any kind of infinitely dimensional topology yields Accurate Results in the case of Diatomic Molecules (e.g. H2) ...:)


Only a special topology in which rho is infinitely dimensional, Phy is the dihedral angle between the planes containing the electrons and the internuclear axis of a H2 molecule.  This special topology makes Rho perpendicular to the interatomic axis of H2.


If you remember that Quantum Lagrangian Principle (QLP), the basis for my Grand Unification Equations derivation, you would realize that that choice of topology is a requirement and the WHY for the Surprising Success of Infinite Dimensionality Scaling.


If you read equation (6) and (7) and understand Figure 2 on his paper, it should become clear that the difference between the incorrect equation (7) and the correct one (6) is the loss of dependence on Phy. This can be seen as if the two Hydrogen nuclei were generating cylindrical dilaton waves and that the electron wavefunction had a k_r component with a de Broglie wavelength r₁ and r₂. This is exactly what one would expect from the Quantum Lagrangian Principle.


IF electron 1 is at distance r₁ from nucleus 1, then it is an integer number of wavelengths from that nucleus or conversely, the de Broglie wavelength (5D dilaton projection onto the Hyperbolic 4D spacetime) is the distance to the nucleus divided by an integer n₁.  This reasoning leads to the proper calculation of excited states.


Remember that the de Broglie wavelegth associated with the nuclei is much broader due to their 2000 times larger inertia.  As you remember, the fundamental dilator has different inertia for the different phases of the coherence.


The QLP states that a dilator will always dilate in phase with the surroundings dilators.  This works both in the 5D spacetime as well as in the 4D spacetime projection.  The 5D dilatons project onto a 4D Hyperbolic Hypersurface as de Broglie Waves.  This means that the Hydrogen atoms will be sitting on the crest of the electron de Broglie wave (at a given Rho-directed momentum).


I wrote this some time ago.  I don't have time to review it, but it is likely to be correct.  Please review the reasoning and comment on it. You might have to read Dudley's paper.


Cheers,


MP

PS- I found this laying around and thought it would be worthwhile publishing.  I was planning to show the detailed derivation of Quantum Mechanics (Schrodinger Equation) from the Quantum Lagrangian Principle, which means a renormalization of the dynamics from 5D Spacetime to 4D Spacetime. The surfing the dilaton field aspect of the Quantum Lagrangian Principle brings in the ondulatory aspects of Quantum Mechanics.  The reduction of one dimension introduces the uncertainty in quantum mechanics - the interference between dilaton fields produces lines in our 3D space where the dilator can be at each step of the hyperspherical expansion. This results uncertainty on the path of a dilator (electrons).  The loci of these positions is described by a dilator wavefunction...:)


I will get back to this problem later.  Let me know if interested in helping me.  I've been very busy and it was never my idea to write the whole chimichanga.  By the way, what I wrote above should be self-evident...:)

The Flu

 

The Flu

Nothing like not being able to think to become vain..:)

I've the flu so I can barely think.. but writing about things I like and know should be a natural choice.

First, let's celebrate a few milestones.  The first one is on the upper right panel containing the Blogged Editor's review of my blog.  I got a Very Good rating and am thankful for that. For me this is a tremendous compliment, since the Editor reviewed the blog not for content although I hope he executed standard crackpot testing..:), but for style, readability and other literary measures. 

The map above shows the distributions of readers, showing that little by little this theory is becoming part of the discussion which is why I wrote this blog.  The number of unique URL readers is actually around 43 thousand readers, a very large number for such an obscure and challenging subject.

The third reason to be thankful for is the presentation of this theory at the  7th Symposium in Honour of Jean-Pierre Vigier 

The  proceedings of the symposium were finally published by the American Institute of Physics. The abstract is here.

 This paper presents a simple and purely geometrical Grand Unification Theory. Quantum Gravity, Electrostatic and Magnetic interactions are shown in a unified framework. Newton's, Gauss' and Biot-Savart's Laws are derived from first principles. Unification symmetry is defined for all the existing forces. This alternative model does not require Strong and Electroweak forces. A 4D Shock -Wave Hyperspherical topology is proposed for the Universe which together with a Quantum Lagrangian Principle and a Dilator based model for matter result in a quantized stepwise expansion for the whole Universe along a radial direction within a 4D spatial manifold. The Hypergeometrical Standard Model for matter, Universe Topology and a new Law of Gravitation are presented. ©2010 American Institute of Physics

This is the goal I had in mind when I started this blog. I wanted to provide an outlet for this idea.  If is right or wrong, that is to be decided on a debate among ideas not by censorship. 

As I mentioned in the prior blog, there is still a factor of two to be corrected in this paper.  I will review it before to long.  It is interesting since it will show that the Hypergeometrical Standard Model predicts a relationship between charge and spin..:) Well, one  can just review the Delta Plus Plus already discussed in prior blogs to have a glimpse of the future...:)

Cheers,

MP

AS FAT AS YOU WILL EVER GET

 AS FAT AS YOU WILL EVER GET

What is a factor of two among friends...:) 

 Sorry disappearing.  I've been horrendously busy for some time.

I had the opportunity to synthesize my work from 140 pages paper into a 26 pages paper soon to be published. In doing so, and in a very short period of time, I had to remember what I wrote many years ago and make sense of it.  In the past, I wrote that you are twice as fat in 4D (5D spacetime) as you are in 3D.

It turned out that this is not a didactic way to present my ideas. It raises inconvenient mapping issues (factors of 2 ) from going from 3D to 4D.

The best way to coherently explain everything will be presented again, and there I will tell you that the Fundamental Dilator (Electromagnetic Fundamental Dilator) is actually HALF of an Hydrogen Atom, which is the Gravitational Fundamental Dilator.

One either say that, or say that we are twice as fat in 5D as I said.  It sounds funny but it is not simplest way to present my ideas.

From now on and in retrospect, I will say that the Electromagnetic Fundamental Dilator

has the 4D Mass of HALF a Hydrogen Atom.

The Gravitational Fundamental Dilator (Hydrogen Atom) has the 4D Mass of a Hydrogen Atom:

You might say, of course, of course, a horse is a horse, of course of course... but things were very confusing when I wrote this while shaking on a New York City subway..:)

By the way, my work has a dearth of references for two reasons, one it was written without the benefit of being in an academic setting with all time in the Universe to go to the library or to conferences and find out whom to kiss up or even honestly honor.  I would love to have more references in it.  It would make justice to other peoples' contribution.  Unfortunately, life is so difficult that I didn't even had the heart to ask one of my few scientific friends for the favor of polishing that aspect of my work.  Maybe if someday this work is reviewed positively, I will gladly ask around for suggestions (in fact, you are always welcome to suggest anything).  If it is reviewed negatively, I will save people from any association by not referring to their work....:)

Hopefully, by the time someone pays attention to this theory, it will be published with all the i's dotted and all the t's crossed...:)  That may or may not happen this time.

By the way, this factor of two explains why I calculated the Magnetic Force (Biot-Savart Law) using 2 Lambda1 (two cycles of a Compton one atomic mass unit wavelength).

I explained correctly at the time, but it is better make you equally fat in 3D and 4D and simplify matters.

Again, I have to let you know that I extremely value criticism.  Had someone criticized my simple theory or complained that He/She was already fat enough, I could had corrected this many years ago...:)

Cheers,

MP

Answers to Questions

Anonymous said...

are all your factors constants or functional approximations?

where is your evidence to confirm their definition for each factor, time, time change according to the history of time, what is space?

Is it constant or variable, or constant/variable, or other...

Thanks for the question. Every so often someone asks a kind of general question that permits me to review the whole theory and in many times, to find a better way to explain my ideas..:)

The theory does not have factors other than the Planck's constant, which relates 3D Mass (inertial mass) to a dilaton projection wavelength and the speed of light.

The theory reproduces the laws of physics and in doing so introduces two new constitutive parameters (elasticity anisotropy and elasticity).  These parameters can be tested by looking at the predicted gravitational wave frequency and by measuring phase match angles of nuclear reactions.

There are two more parameters (dephasings associated with transmutation notes, explained further in this blog), that are associated with the time it takes for an electron (proton) to rotate 90 degrees in the 3D space.

They differ from constants in other theories since they have a very simple and physical meanings and come in a very small number.  These six constants are the minimum information one needs to explain the whole Universe.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The fundamental components of this theory are :

1. Particles are modeled as dilators
   
   Dimensional notes associated with Electron and Positron. Vertical letters indicates perpendicularity with respect to our 3D Universe
2. Dilators are coherences between stationary deformation states of a local metric.
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   Lower (higher) state is associated with Proton(Electron). The initial state (in phase with the 3D Universe) defines the particle nature (proton, antiproton,electron or positron).
3. The Hypergeometrical Universe topology (3D Universe is a lightspeed expanding hyperspherical shockwave)
4. Dilators are thin along the radial direction and spin at half the speed of tunneling, that is, when the wavefunction describing the dilator moves from one shape to another (180 degrees), the dilator profile rotates by 90 degrees.
5. Pseudo-time quantization results from item 4). Interaction only occurs when the dilator has a footprint on the 3D Universe.
6. Dilators motion along the 4D spatial manifold obeys the Quantum Lagrangian Principle which states that dilators always dilate in phase with surrounding dilaton field.
7. Items 6, 5 and the embedding of the 3D lightspeed expanding hyperspherical shockwave Universe within a 4D spatial manifold allows for the uncertainty that creates Quantum Mechanical behavior. This means that the Hypergeometrical Universe provides the reasons for the observed Quantum Mechanics.
8. The two cross-sections shown at the top of this and almost any other posting here, shows that the Hypergeometrical Universe contains an Absolute Time, a preferential direction but the absolute time cannot be used to time anything other than the Universe expansion. The preferential direction cannot be seen within the 3D expanding Hypersphere where we live.

Dilators motion along the 4D spatial manifold obeys the Quantum Lagrangian Principle which states that dilators always dilate in phase with surrounding dilaton field.

At any de Broglie step of the Hypergeometrical Universe expansion (one step is equal to the Compton wavelength of a Hydrogen atom), the dilator has to move itself by distance x to satisfy the Quantum Lagrangian Principle, that is, to dilate in phase with the surrounding field.

 In this picture, I show two angles. Alpha1 is the arctan(x/Lambda1), where Lambda1 is the Compton Wavelength of a Hydrogen atom (around 10^-15meters).

If you are a charged fundamental dilator (non spin zero dilator), your k-vector is now along that new direction. If you are a neutral particle (e.g. a hydrogen atom or a neutron), you will also move yourself by distance x, but your k-vector will only point along angle alpha0 or thereabouts. Angle Alpha0 is arctan(x/(R0+lambda1), where R0 is the radius of the Universe (equal to 21.72 billion light years).


The Universe is actually 21.72 Billion Years old, by which I mean that this radius is consistent with the Pioneer Anomaly (it was derived from the Pioneer Anomaly observations) and explains everything in Cosmology.  There is another way to calibrate this radius but I would need the redshift data for all the Stellar Candles.  That would be an independent measure of the age/radius of the Universe.

This difference in change of direction rate (the change in direction happens at each de Broglie step of the expansion) explains the difference in strength between electromagnetic and gravitational forces. This means that the "force" represented here by the dilaton field and the Quantum Lagrangian Principle is the same.  What differs is what the "particle" does in response to that interaction.  This is real Grand Unification.

Discrepancies are associated with physical quantities (elasticity of space in the case of gravitation and elasticity anisotropy in the case of electromagnetism). From the elasticity of space derived from the Gravitational constant, one derives the natural frequency of Gravitational Waves. From the anisotropy of elasticity one derives the phase matching conditions required for coherent nuclear fusion, antimatter creation etc…J

If you look at the plot below for a neutron dilation levels you can find the meaning of electron neutrinos. They correspond to the subcoherence between protons and electrons. These subcoherences (half-electron neutrino each) correspond themselves to rotations within the 3D space (as opposed to tumbling withing the 4D spatial manifold). The dephasing associated with this rotation defines the mass of all isotopes, that is, one parameter is used to calculate the mass of everything that is composed of protons and neutrons.

Hyperons requires the knowledge of another dephasing parameter from the pions composition shown below:

Pion Minus diagram.

Here the red lines correspond to the already know half-electron-neutrino. The blue lines correspond to a new dephasing process.

This dephasing process happens by rotations on the upper states and corresponds to rotations of the electron state within the 3D Universe. With this dephasing parameter all other particles in the Univers can have their masses calculated. If you know how to split a neutrino, you can make antimatter..:)

Now let's talk about constants. The theory derives formulas for Cosmological Constants like Newton's Gravitational constant G given by:

= space elasticity

P=3.5

K=elasticity anisotropy

Derivation is simple and it is on the pdfs.

The natural laws for Gravitation and Electromagnetism are derived from first principles as:

or

Where C1 and C2 are the charges traveling at V1 and V2 and c is the speed of light.

For Gravitational one has exactly the same equation (Gyrogravity). This equation is consistent with Pioneer Anomaly , Gravitational Lensing , the Precession of Mercury Perihelion and explains the Galactic Puzzle (the constant angular speed of mass distributions within spiral galaxies). All these demonstrations are posted within this blog.

This means that one equation describes Electrostatics, Magnetism and Gravitation and this equation was derived from first principles using the fundamental hypotheses presented above.

The Hypergeometrical Universe theory explains the particle physics aspects of the Universe including the puzzling aspects of Cosmology. Currently there are two inconsistent observations:

1. Hubble measurements using short distance calibration indicates that the Universe is around 14 billion years old. 
2. Standard Stellar Candles (Supernovae type 1A) which are supposed to have constant luminosity through all ages of the Universe life, indicates that the furthest observed Stellar Candle to be around 50-60 Billion light years away. This conclusion is arrived by observing exceedingly weak supernovae type 1A explosion. The weaker the supernovae luminosity the larger the distance inferred (apparent luminosity decays with the inverse of the distance squared).

ActualRadius= ActualAgeOfTheUniverse	21.72				AgeOfTheUniverse as inferred from Hubble Constant=15.36		Pi/180
RadiusOfTheUniverse	Lambda	RedShit	Candle Inferred Distance (BillionLightYears)	alpha	alpha	45-alpha	1A StellarCandleSize
21.72	1.00	-	-	45	0.79	-	1.00
21.34	1.02	(0.02)	(0.39)	44	0.77	0.02	0.98
20.95	1.04	(0.04)	(0.79)	43	0.75	0.03	0.96
20.56	1.06	(0.05)	(1.21)	42	0.73	0.05	0.95
20.15	1.08	(0.07)	(1.64)	41	0.72	0.07	0.93
19.75	1.10	(0.09)	(2.09)	40	0.70	0.09	0.91
19.33	1.12	(0.11)	(2.56)	39	0.68	0.10	0.89
18.91	1.15	(0.13)	(3.05)	38	0.66	0.12	0.87
18.49	1.17	(0.15)	(3.55)	37	0.65	0.14	0.85
18.06	1.20	(0.17)	(4.07)	36	0.63	0.16	0.83
17.62	1.23	(0.19)	(4.61)	35	0.61	0.17	0.81
17.18	1.26	(0.21)	(5.18)	34	0.59	0.19	0.79
16.73	1.30	(0.23)	(5.77)	33	0.58	0.21	0.77
16.28	1.33	(0.25)	(6.38)	32	0.56	0.23	0.75
15.82	1.37	(0.27)	(7.02)	31	0.54	0.24	0.73
15.36	1.41	(0.29)	(7.68)	30	0.52	0.26	0.71
14.89	1.46	(0.31)	(8.38)	29	0.51	0.28	0.69
14.42	1.51	(0.34)	(9.11)	28	0.49	0.30	0.66
13.95	1.56	(0.36)	(9.88)	27	0.47	0.31	0.64
13.47	1.61	(0.38)	(10.68)	26	0.45	0.33	0.62
12.98	1.67	(0.40)	(11.52)	25	0.44	0.35	0.60
12.49	1.74	(0.42)	(12.41)	24	0.42	0.37	0.58
12.00	1.81	(0.45)	(13.35)	23	0.40	0.38	0.55
11.51	1.89	(0.47)	(14.35)	22	0.38	0.40	0.53
11.01	1.97	(0.49)	(15.40)	21	0.37	0.42	0.51
10.51	2.07	(0.52)	(16.53)	20	0.35	0.44	0.48
10.00	2.17	(0.54)	(17.73)	19	0.33	0.45	0.46
9.49	2.29	(0.56)	(19.02)	18	0.31	0.47	0.44
8.98	2.42	(0.59)	(20.41)	17	0.30	0.49	0.41
8.47	2.57	(0.61)	(21.91)	16	0.28	0.51	0.39
7.95	2.73	(0.63)	(23.54)	15	0.26	0.52	0.37
7.43	2.92	(0.66)	(25.34)	14	0.24	0.54	0.34
6.91	3.14	(0.68)	(27.32)	13	0.23	0.56	0.32
6.39	3.40	(0.71)	(29.52)	12	0.21	0.58	0.29
5.86	3.71	(0.73)	(32.01)	11	0.19	0.59	0.27
5.33	4.07	(0.75)	(34.84)	10	0.17	0.61	0.25
4.81	4.52	(0.78)	(38.13)	9	0.16	0.63	0.22
4.28	5.08	(0.80)	(42.03)	8	0.14	0.65	0.20
3.74	5.80	(0.83)	(46.76)	7	0.12	0.66	0.17
3.21	6.76	(0.85)	(52.73)	6	0.10	0.68	0.15
2.68	8.11	(0.88)	(60.64)	5	0.09	0.70	0.12
2.14	10.14	(0.90)	(71.97)	4	0.07	0.72	0.10
1.61	13.51	(0.93)	(90.54)	3	0.05	0.73	0.07
1.07	20.26	(0.95)	(131.44)	2	0.03	0.75	0.05
0.54	40.52	(0.98)		1	0.02	0.77	0.02

This inconsistency is easily explained by the Hypergeometrical Universe theory. Just look at the dependence of the Gravitational "constant" G. It decays with the inverse of the Radius of the Universe. This means that at early epochs, when the radius of the Universe was half (quarter) of today's radius (21.72 billion light years as derived from the Pioneer Anomaly results), G would be twice (four) times larger. A larger value of G means that the supernovae 1A will contain a smaller mass in the early Universe. This correction indicates that the perception of 60 Billion Years away supernova, just means that that supernova is at 2.68 billion years old Universe, no paradox there… NO NEED FOR INFLATION….:) whatever price you paid for your condo at the beginning of times, it is the same you would pay now..:)

To understand the reason why there is an angle alpha, one has to remember that one always see the past at 45 degrees angle with respect the the prior hypersphere (prior epoch).  Simple geometry is used to derive the redshift and distance from where we are right now for a given alpha.  The 21.72 billion light years radius of the Universe was derived in the Pioneer Anomaly .  It seems that I called alpha beta in my prior derivation...:) what can I say, this is not my daytime job...:) Look at this plot below and see alpha where it is written beta...:)

This is a live derivation of the hypergeometrical universe theory and I ended up having to tackle the Pioneer anomaly three times before getting everything right.  It doesn't help that the New York subway is so hot and crowded these days...:)

To prove that my theory provides the reason for Quantum Mechanics is trivial and will be presented later in this blog. Only only needs to eliminate the large dilator number approximation (as mentioned many times here and in the pdf containing the theory). This approximation expresses the concept that when one interact large number of dilators in a body, the observed wavelength decreases with the mass (number of dilators). This is the result of the interference pattern along any direction in the neighborhood of a macroscopic body.  This approximation was used to derive the equations for the "Natural Laws", which are macroscopic laws. If you try to use these laws directly in a microscopic problem one wouldn't obtain a quantum mechanical behavior, unless you come up with a contrived theory like QM and an ad-hoc equation like Schroedinger's equation.

When dealing with a single dilator or a small number of dilators as in a molecule, one cannot use this approximation. Not using the approximation means that particles will dance in a four-dimensional lightspeed traveling Lissajous interferometric pattern.  This pattern is imprinted on space itself as dilaton waves interference.

If you want to understand the Cosmogenesis, please let me know..:) The explanation is simple and based upon these two plots..:)

Before I forget:
SPACE


What is space. Space and Absolute time are quasi-constants, that is, they exist always as they are now, but they exist after the dimensional transition that created the extra four spatial dimensions..:)


I am agnostic with respect to the proposition that space is being created ahead of the hypergeometrical universe expansion or if there is already space there...:)  That is irrelevant because it cannot be tested.


Space itself, as far as I am concerned, is just a Cartesian medium which presents no friction, no dephasing events and has a restoring force (elasticity). I am agnostic with respect to any sub-structure since I don't believe any experiment could probe any substructure. The reason is that colliding particles also follow the Quantum Lagrangian Principle, that is, they are always in quantized positions determined by the interference pattern of the dilaton field during their interactions.


A cartesian space would work for all two cross-sections if I didn't have to reproduce current relativistic views.  Current views based upon the choice of dynamic laws requires TauXYZ (spacetime) to be hyperbolic, thus the hyperbolic tangent in the Hypergeometrical Universe Newton's Second Law.

Huygens Principle

Huygens and Newton debated how to describe the dynamics of interacting bodies. Newton won.

Huygens was biased by his optical interference experiments and wanted to explain all motions (interaction) as being the sole product of interacting waves, a simplistic reasoning. If you think that the Quantum Lagrangian Principle is equivalent to the Huygens Principle you are wrong. The QLP describes what is happening on the RXYZ cross-section shown in the first figure in this posting. We don't live there…:) at least, we can only see that cross-section with the eye of the mind..:)


We live in the TauXYZ cross-section, where Tau is the proper time. I modified Newton's Second Law to present it as a Spatial Stress-Strain relationship between these two cross-sections

Let's make Area _4D =1 then Area3D is just the overlapping of the unitary dilator 4D volume with the Fabric of Space.

Notice the hyperbolic tangent on the 3D Strain. This is a requirement for relativity.

Even though the dilator moves in the RXYZ following an interference pattern, the dynamics has to be described in the TauXYZ. In that cross-section, wavelengths vary with velocity and one cannot simply imagine motion through an interference pattern. Here one has to take into consideration Doppler shifts of the dilator wavelength while creating the 3D Lissajous figures where dilators will pop-up at each de Broglie step of the Universe expansion. Of course, these Doppler shifts are measured in the Schroedinger equations as changes in momentum or forces.

Had Huygens followed this simple reasoning, he would have discovered Quantum Mechanics.

Cheers,

MP